No that’s just basic economics. Necessary to think that way if a company exceeds a certain size and has different products in the same class. No matter if it is cars or fountain pens. Normal technical terminology.
Kannibalisierungseffekt | Marketing - Welt der BWL (German, didn’t find one so quickly in English)
And after all: that way we can rationalize buying and owning ever more machines. I love the dopamine kick of new or different gear (more on that in the ancient syntakt thread) 
There will ne huge disappointment when people will know that there is no Digitalt mk2 this year
Love that pre-excitement phase. Even bought a ticket to superbooth Hope they don’t wait until the very last moment the very last day. Can be there only one day.
But there will be something, felt p~.978 
I think we get the point, no need to tell it once a week.
well, there is a lot in this thread that is mentioned, theorised or fabulized about again and again. cause its quite long
That’s the fun with it. I just read the epic syntakt speculation thread again And someone was spot on in the 18th post! 
Are we skipping mk2 and going straight to mk3? Nice.
Did R? I just read we shouldn’t spread misinformation and disinformation 
I bet against the market - buying digitakts for lowest prices in the dozens right now But then I would be disappointed if they did introduce a digitakt mk 2⁴ for 599 EUR
So, that said. Someone will be disappointed. Can we agree on that? Either those with positive or those with negative expectations. Or those who bought new DT and 30 day money back period is over.
Dude you’re giving too much false info about the AR
Yup. Already have.
I think Arturia are releasing something today as part of their 25yr celebrations
Hopefully it’ll be a disappointment mk2
Florian will be delighted
Introducing the Disappointakt
Features:
Can only be turned on once. Ever.
Comes with pre selected samples. Samples may be added but must be in the inaudible human ear range.
Play button means turn off. Press stop 5 times for normal play behaviour.
Samples can only be manipulated via ai prompts
Comes with edible instruction manual.
Compatible with overbridge on windows xp
Premium users get the ad free version
Why would anyone feel disappointed by a machine that yet does not exist, that no one is obligated to buy, in an completely full of other options market?
There’s a significant difference between what humans perceive as complex, and what is complex for computers (especially limited computers like embedded microcontrollers or DSP chips) to do.
Some of the things you may be perceiving as “complex” new features—e.g. the new Euclidean sequencer mode—may actually consume very little resources compared to an LFO. An LFO has to be computed in real time for every tick of the sampling rate of the machine, as well as its effects on whatever it’s modulating. Computing a Euclidean sequence requires a much lower time granularity, and moreover you can handle it even more efficiently by pre-generating a truth table of all possible permutations of the available Euclidean parameters, and then just doing a simple data lookup from the table when you need a pattern. Then all you need is enough memory to store the table, which can be quite tiny, and frees up CPU cycles for other things.
That brings us to another reality: embedded systems like this have multiple kinds of resources—CPU, memory, the bandwidth of the memory circuits, the processing power and memory of various subsystems such as DACs and USB, etc. When a hardware system like this gets initially designed, there’s typically some advance planning for future growth in firmware updates, but the designers can’t always anticipate what updates will be needed and what resources they will require. You may think you’ve given yourself enough room to do everything the users might ask for after 1.0, but sometimes the users surprise you by wanting different things, and you have to adapt within the limitations you have already set yourself. It only takes exceeding the limit of any one of these resources for a feature to become technically infeasible—e.g. you may have tons of free memory but be all out of CPU cycles, or bandwidth to communicate with the memory.
TL;DR—when the developers of embedded systems tell me a feature is technically infeasible, I am inclined to believe them. It may seem like a simple task to me, but they are the experts in the limitations of the specific system they have designed.
I’d go with emotional system associated expectations, crash of reward system feedback loop and such. The whole thing why PR and advertising exist in the first place